InTech-Molecular Mechanisms in Synaptic Plasticity

7/28/2019 InTech-Molecular Mechanisms in Synaptic Plasticity

1/37

13

Molecular Mechanisms in Synaptic Plasticity

M. Mayadevi*, G.M. Archana*,Ramya R. Prabhu* and R.V. Omkumar

Molecular Neurobiology Division,Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology, Thycaud, Kerala,

India

1. Introduction

Brain is a sophisticated information processing and storage system with capabilities

unmatched by any manmade computers. Neurons, the primary building blocks of the brainare structurally and functionally specialized to do these functions. The neuronal membraneis equipped with several types of ion channel and ion pump proteins which enable it toconduct nerve impulses in the form of electrochemical signals called action potentials. Thehighly branched structure of the neuron with dendrites and axons helps in not onlytransmitting these signals but also in information processing by integrating multiple inputs.Storage of information, on the other hand, happens by permanent changes in the brainconsequent to activity that will serve the function of recording information input. Thisremarkable property of the brain is known as plasticity and brings about changes in thestructures and functions of the brain in response to internal and external stimuli. Plasticitycan be defined as the ability of neural circuitry to undergo modifications consequent to

experience and thereby modify future thought, behaviour and feeling. Neuronal activity canmodify the behaviour of neural circuits by one of the three mechanisms : (a) by modifyingthe strength or efficacy of synaptic transmission at pre-existing synapses, (b) by eliciting thegrowth of new synaptic connections or the pruning away of existing ones, or (c) bymodulating the excitability of individual neurons (Malenka, 2002). It is now reasonably wellestablished that synapses are the primary sites of information storage, enabled by synapticplasticity.

Synaptic plasticity is the cellular phenomenon by which synapses can undergo permanent

changes in their properties consequent to specific patterns of activity. Since synaptic activityrepresents incoming information into the brain, the consequent permanent changes insynapses are thought to serve as the engram or record of the information. Hencemechanisms underlying synaptic plasticity events have attracted considerable attention asthe molecular basis of learning and memory.

Synaptic plasticity was first proposed as a cellular mechanism for memory by Donald Hebb

in 1949. According to Hebbs postulate, repeated communication between two neurons via

* Equal contribution Corresponding Author

www.intechopen.com


2/37

Neuroscience Dealing with Frontiers296

synaptic transmission can cause an enhancement in the efficacy of transmission betweenthose neurons, brought about by biochemical changes at the synapses. Accordingly Hebbian

conditioning needs both presynaptic and postsynaptic activity for its induction. This wasfollowed by a search for instances where synaptic efficacy is altered. The discovery of Long

term potentiation (LTP) by Bliss and Lomo in 1973 (Bliss & Lomo, 1973) was the firstdemonstration of synaptic plasticity. LTP had all the characteristics necessary for a

mechanism responsible for learning and memory and thus gained acceptance as a cellular

correlate or cellular model system for learning and memory. Moreover, the cellular systemwith reduced complexity compared to the animal models was more amenable for

interrogations at the molecular level. LTP thus became an essential component of aparadigm in which initial insights on molecular mechanisms are provided by experiments

involving LTP which could then be validated in higher animal models.

In addition to the fundamental interest of how learning and memory are performed bybrain, the study of synaptic plasticity is also attractive as it could lead to practical

applications. The principles governing the workings of the molecular machineries involvedin synaptic plasticity could be useful in the design of manmade memory devices. In the caseof many CNS disorders, early aberrations at the molecular level are likely to involvesynaptic plasticity mechanisms since the initial clinical symptoms very often involvecognitive impairments such as deficits in learning and memory. These mechanisms could bepossible targets for early therapeutic intervention, provided they drive further molecularprocesses leading to the pathology of such diseases. Understanding of the mechanisms ofsynaptic plasticity would be of great therapeutic value in such instances.

A major challenge in understanding the molecular mechanisms of synaptic plasticity hasbeen the diversity in the underlying mechanisms in different parts of the brain. The current

article has reviewed the literature on molecular mechanisms that are involved in theinduction and maintenance of different forms synaptic plasticity, mainly LTP and long termdepression (LTD) and has attempted to simplify the scenario by extracting general featurespossessed by these mechanisms. Impairments in synaptic plasticity that could occur indisease conditions have also been touched upon.

2. Synaptic plasticity

The term Synaptic plasticity refers to the activity dependent changes in the efficacy ofsynaptic communication. Donald Hebb in 1949 developed a hypothesis about themechanism of learning and memory at the neuronal level. Clinical observations enabledinvestigators to link human memory dysfunction to the hippocampus (Scoville & Milner,1957; Olds, 1972). These developments stimulated research in the field of synaptic plasticityin the mammalian brain (Blundon, 2008). Synaptic plasticity has been most extensivelystudied at the Schaffer-collateral pathway (Bliss, 2011) in the hippocampus, the seat oflearning and memory, especially declarative memory. In 1973, Bliss and his associates

reported that tetanic stimulation of the perforant pathway of presynaptic fibres resulted inhigh responses at postsynaptic sites on granule cells at the dentate gyrus region, to electricstimulation. The experiments were conducted in vivo with anaesthetized rabbits. They calledthe effect LTP because of the elevation of the postsynaptic potential, which could serve as acellular substrate for information storage (Bliss & Lomo, 1973).

www.intechopen.com


3/37

Molecular Mechanisms in Synaptic Plasticity 297

Several observations from a variety of species indicate that synaptic plasticity and memoryare correlative. Behavioural and in vitro studies suggest that activity-induced synapticmodulations, such as LTP, play a role in information storage in the brain. This idea has beenproposed as the synaptic plasticity and memory (SPM) hypothesis (Martin et al., 2000),

and has been a major driving force behind the study of synaptic plasticity. Synapticplasticity includes both short-term changes in the strength or efficacy of neurotransmissionas well as longer-term changes in the structure of synapses (Kandel, 2001). Experimentalmodels of changes in synaptic strength or effectiveness in response to repeated electricalstimulation are thought to mimic physiological plasticity at the neuronal level. The efficacyof synaptic transmission could increase as in LTP or it could decrease as in LTD as a resultof plasticity. These modifications in synaptic strength, both positive and negative,distributed across millions of connections among neurons, are believed to form the physicaland biochemical substrates for learning and memory.

Hippocampal LTP became a favourite model for the study of learning and memory due to

the following reasons. First, there is compelling evidence from studies in rodents and higherprimates, including humans, that the hippocampus is a critical component of the neural

system involved in various forms of long-term memory. Second, several properties of LTPmake it an attractive cellular mechanism for information storage. Like memories, LTP can be

generated rapidly and is prolonged and strengthened with repetition. It is also input specificin that it is elicited at the synapses activated by afferent activity and not at adjacent synapses

on the same postsynaptic cell (Malenka,2002).

3. Long term potentiation

LTP is an activity-dependent, persistent enhancement of synaptic strength. LTP mainlyoccurs at glutamatergic synapses and is often measured in terms of the magnitude of

excitatory post synaptic potential (EPSP) enhancement at a given time-point after induction.This measurement is influenced by the initial magnitude of potentiation and the decay rateof the potentiation and are independently regulated. Generally longer-lasting forms ofplasticity are observed following repetitive or tetanic stimulation of synapses withprolonged (approximately 200-millisecond to 5-second) trains of stimuli applied at highfrequencies (10 to 200 Hz).

3.1 Phases of LTP

LTP is formed by a series of distinguishable mechanisms. LTP can be divided into twotemporally distinct phases such as early and late phases. Early LTP (E-LTP) lasts for about 1-3 hrs and requires modification of existing proteins and their trafficking at synapses but notde novo protein synthesis (Bliss & Collingridge, 1993; Malenka & Bear, 2004). This shortlasting form of LTP can be induced by a weak, high frequency tetanus (single train of 100pulses at 100 Hz). Late LTP (L-LTP) requires the synthesis of RNA, new proteins andprotein kinase activity especially cyclic adenosine 3, 5-monophosphate (cAMP)dependentprotein kinase or protein kinase A (PKA) (Frey et al., 1993; Huang and Kandel, 1994;Nguyen et al., 1994), which lasts for up to 8-10 hrs in vitro and weeks in vivo. L-LTP can beinduced by repeated strong high frequency stimulation such as multiple trains of 100 pulsesat 100 Hz and is necessary for structural modification of synapses (Lu et al., 2007).

www.intechopen.com


4/37


3.2 Types of LTP

Even though plasticity events can be distinguished as either LTP or LTD, a huge variation informs of LTP has also been observed. Several factors contribute to these different types ofLTP. LTP varies with the type of molecular pathway involved in its induction as can be seenin the case of LTP in hippocampal CA1 region which is either N-methyl-D-aspartatereceptor (NMDAR) dependent or independent. Different regions of brain show differentforms of LTP. The age of the organism also contributes to the variation in LTP. LTP inneonatal (


5/37


another afferent on the same cell, then the weakly stimulated afferent also exhibits LTP

(Levy & Steward, 1979). This property is called as associativity. This property makes LTP an

attractive mechanism for associating two pieces of information being conveyed by different

sets of afferents that synapse on the same postsynaptic cell (Malenka, 2003).

3.3.3 Cooperativity

LTP can also be generated by weaker stimulation of a crucial number of presynaptic fibres

to achieve a threshold stimulation to activate a postsynaptic neuron to induce LTP. This

property is called cooperativity because different presynaptic fibres are cooperatively

eliciting LTP.

3.3.4 Persistence

In addition to the above mentioned three characteristics, persistence can also be included as

a fourth characteristic. LTP is persistent, lasting from several minutes to many months aslong as the memory persists.

3.4 Molecular mechanisms of LTP

The cellular and molecular mechanisms of LTP induction are comprised of many events

such as covalent modification of pre-existing proteins, the activation of cellular programs for

gene expression and increased protein synthesis. The regulatory events move

from the synapse to the nucleus and then back to the synapse in the course of LTP

induction.

LTP induction experiments have mostly been done in hippocampal excitatory synapses. Thehippocampus is divided into three distinctive regions composed of three distinctive kinds ofcells. The dentate gyrus (DG), which is composed of granule cells and the CA3 and CA1regions, which are composed of pyramidal cells having different properties. These regionsare connected by well defined pathways through which signals traverse the hippocampus.The perforant fibre pathway (pp) from the entorhinal cortex forms excitatory connectionswith the granule cells of the DG. The granule cells give rise to axons that form the mossyfibre pathway (mf), which connects with the pyramidal cells in area CA3 of thehippocampus. The pyramidal cells of the CA3 region project to the pyramidal cells in CA1by means of the Schaffer collateral pathway (Fig. 1).

LTP is widely studied in the CA1 region of the hippocampus (Bliss and Collingridge, 1993;Reymann and Frey, 2007). The establishment of LTP in the CA1 region requires both

presynaptic activity and large postsynaptic depolarization. The original stimulus protocolused by Bliss and Lomo in the anesthetized rabbit ranged from 10 to 100 Hz (Bliss & Lomo,1973). Since that time, a variety of LTP induction protocols from different research groupshave emerged in the literature. Most involve trains of high-frequency stimulation(tetanization) that are delivered to presynaptic axons. The tetanization typically lasts severalseconds and is delivered at frequencies of 25 to 400 Hz.

The induction of LTP requires an influx of calcium into the postsynaptic neuron that can be

either through NMDAR dependent or NMDAR-independent mechanisms.

www.intechopen.com


6/37


Fig. 1. Hippocampus

3.4.1 NMDAR dependent mechanism (NMDAR-LTP)

The best understood form of LTP is induced by the activation of the NMDAR complex. Thissubtype of glutamate receptor allows electrical events at the postsynaptic membrane to betransduced into chemical signals which, in turn, are thought to activate both pre andpostsynaptic mechanisms to generate a persistent increase in synaptic strength.

Glutamate is a major excitatory neurotransmitter in the brain. During nerve impulse

transmission, glutamate will be released into the synapse from the presynaptic terminal.Glutamate receptors present on the postsynaptic membrane are the initial triggers for the

ensuing postsynaptic calcium signaling mechanism responsible for the induction of LTP.

NMDA, -amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) and kainate

receptors are the ionotropic-glutamate receptors present on the postsynaptic membrane.

Among these NMDA and AMPA receptors play an important role in the induction of LTP.

NMDARs are formed from hetero-tetrameric assemblies of GluN1 (previously NR1)

subunits with GluN2A-D (NR2A-D) and Glu3A/B (NR3A/B). NMDARs require the

binding of L-glutamate and the co-agonist glycine, as well as depolarization, to become

activated and conduct Na+, K+ and Ca2+ ions. AMPARs are composed of four subunits,

GluA1-4 (previously GluR1-4). The Q/R edited GluA2 subunit is critical for the biophysicalproperties of AMPARs producing low conductance, non-rectifying, Ca2+-impermeable

AMPARs. Postnatally the great majority of AMPARs contain edited GluA2 in excitatory

synapses.

Glutamate binding to the AMPA receptor leads to a sodium influx into the postsynaptic

compartment. This leads to depolarization causing release of Mg2+ block present on the

NMDA receptor. The binding of glutamate and the removal of Mg2+ block causes NMDA

receptor to open and conduct Ca2+ and Na+ into the cell. The influx of Ca2+ is essential for

LTP induction. With repeated activation of the neuron, sufficient calcium will enter into the

postsynaptic compartment and triggers the molecular events needed for the induction of

www.intechopen.com


7/37


LTP. This calcium influx activates several important signaling pathways involving different

protein kinases and phosphatases. One of the kinases activated by the influx of calcium

through NMDARs is Ca2+/calmodulin dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII), which is

known as the memory molecule. CaMKII is a Ser/Thr protein kinase, abundant in

glutamatergic postsynaptic terminal. The activation of CaMKII by Ca2+/CaM complexleads to the formation of autophosphorylated enzyme at Thr286 position, which will make

it calcium independent. Thus the Thr286 autophosphorylated form of the enzyme will

maintain its activity even though Ca2+/CaM complex is removed from its regulatory

domain. The autophosphorylation can enhance binding affinity of the enzyme for

Ca2+/CaM by a 1000 fold. Studies have shown that Thr286 autophosphorylated enzyme is

required for the induction of LTP. Upon activation, CaMKII can rapidly translocate to the

postsynaptic density (PSD), where postsynaptic receptors such as AMPAR and NMDAR

are concentrated. The translocated CaMKII can bind to different subunits of NMDAR such

as GluN1, GluN2A and GluN2B, which are the ideal postsynaptic adapters. Of these,

GluN2B-CaMKII interaction is well characterized and is essential for the induction andmaintenance of LTP (Barria & Malinow, 2005; Lisman et al., 2011). The AMPAR is one of

the substrates for CaMKII (as well as for PKC) in the PSD where CaMKII can

phosphorylate GluA1 subunit of AMPAR at Ser831. This phosphorylation of GluA1 by

CaMKII (Barria et al., 1997b) leads to an increased conductance of homomeric GluA1

channels (Derkach et al., 1999) and is believed to be one of the major contributors to the

enhanced efficacy of glutamatergic synapses in CA1 area of hippocampus during LTP

(Fig. 2).

LTP can occur either in AMPAR containing synapses or in synapses lacking AMPAR. Whena glutamatergic synapse is formed, only NMDAR will be present in the postsynaptic

membrane. Such synapses lacking AMPA receptors are called silent synapses, where AMPARgets inserted in the postsynaptic membrane during the activation of nearby synapses. As a

consequence of NMDAR activation and the resulting Ca2+ influx into the post synaptic

dendrite, new AMPARs get inserted into the post synaptic membrane. This AMPAficationof the synapse makes the transmission stronger (Bear, 2001). Thus enhanced AMPAR

activity either by increase in AMPAR abundance in the synapse or by increase in theconductivity of AMPARs is the key postsynaptic mechanism leading to increase in EPSP

response seen in LTP. Studies have shown that activated forms of -CaMKII can enhance

the synaptic trafficking of AMPARs. PKA can also participate in AMPAfication by

phosphorylating GluA1 at Ser845 which enhances AMPAR exocytosis (Oh, 2005). AMPAR

recruitment mediated by PKA is shown in Fig. 3. Activation of PKA also boosts the activityof CaMKII indirectly by decreasing the competing protein phosphatase activity especially

protein phosphatase 1(PP1). PKA inhibits PP1 by activating the inhibitor of PP1 calledinhibitor-1(Bryne, 2009).

Several other protein kinases, including protein kinase C (PKC), PKA, the tyrosine kinase

Src, and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK), have also been suggested to contribute

to LTP (Teyler et al., 1987). The evidence in support of critical roles for these kinases is,

however, considerably weaker than that for CaMKII. PKC has been suggested to play a role

analogous to that of CaMKII, because PKC inhibitors have been reported to block LTP and

increasing postsynaptic PKC activity can enhance synaptic transmission (Hu et al., 1987).

www.intechopen.com


8/37


Fig. 2. Molecular mechanisms of NMDAR Dependent LTP.

The calcium influx through NMDAR also activates adenyl cyclase, which generates cAMP

in the postsynaptic compartment. This second messenger generated thus triggers a series ofdownstream signalling mechanisms, which function more in LTP maintenance. The local

increase in cAMP levels leads to the activation of PKA by causing the catalytic subunits of

this enzyme to dissociate from the regulatory subunits.

The activated PKA can regulate gene expression. PKA can modify transcription byphosphorylating several different transcription factors, one of which is the cAMP responseelement binding protein (CREB). CREB is a nuclear protein that modulates transcriptionof genes containing cAMP response elements (CRE) in their promoters (Kandel, 2001). Thecatalytic subunits of PKA can translocate to nucleus and phosphorylate serine-133 onCREB.

www.intechopen.com


9/37


Fig. 3. AMPAR exocytosis regulation by PKA. Ca2+ signaling can activate PKA via adenyl

cyclase-cAMP pathway. PKA can phosphorylate GluA1 subunit of AMPAR at Ser845

andthis leads to the recruitment of AMPARs into extrasynaptic site. This extrasynaptic pool ofAMPARs can then diffuse to PSD during NMDAR activation.

This phosphorylation can initiate transcription of CRE-associated genes. One protein that is

regulated by the CREB family of transcription factors is brain-derived neurotrophic factor

(BDNF), a key regulator in the conversion of E-LTP to L-LTP. BDNF can bind to a specific

receptor tyrosine kinase, TrkB. This binding results in dimerization and autophosphorylation

of the Trk receptors, leading to activation of the tyrosine kinases. Activated receptors in

general are capable of triggering a number of signal transduction cascades including the

MAPK pathway, the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway, and the phospholipase C-

(PLC-) pathway. The signals thus generated also can pass on to the nucleus to cause furtheractivation of transcription factors and alterations in gene expression (Lu, 2003).

PKA can also recruit MAPK to the nucleus where it can phosphorylate other kinases andtranscription factors (eg: CREB) to activate gene transcription. Extra cellular signal regulatedprotein kinase (ERK), is a member of the mitogen-activated family of protein kinases, whichplay a crucial role in L-LTP. ERK activity is required to initiate the local translation ofmessenger RNAs (mRNAs) that are present at spines into functional proteins. Anotherfunction of ERK is its rapid translocation into the nucleus of the neuron where itphosphorylates several regulatory transcription factors. This leads to the transcription ofseveral mRNAs that are transported along dendrites toward the spines and their synapses.

www.intechopen.com


10/37


The tyrosine kinases Src and Fyn indirectly affect LTP by modulating NMDAR function.These Src family of tyrosine kinases can alter NMDAR function by phosphorylatingGluN2A and 2B subunits, thereby relieving a basal zinc inhibition of the NMDAR.Phosphorylation of GluN2A or 2B thus potentiates the current through NMDAR complex.

The increase in calcium concentration thus produced can contribute to the process of LTP.

Recent studies indicate that another subclass of glutamate receptors, the metabotropicglutamate receptors (mGluRs) are also involved in LTP induction (Bashir, 1993). In addition toactivating ion channel-linked receptors, glutamate activates G protein-coupled metabotropicreceptors which exist in eight different types labeled mGluR1 to mGluR8 which are classifiedinto groups I, II, and III. Receptor types are grouped based on receptor structure andphysiological activity. mGluR subtypes 1 and 5 (group I mGluRs) are positively coupled tophospholipase C (PLC), and trigger elevations in intracellular inositol triphosphate (IP3) anddiacylglycerol (DAG), followed by mobilization of Ca2+ and activation of PKC (Benquet, 2002).Group I mGluRs are known to modulate the function of NMDAR by binding to PDZ proteins

near to NMDAR (Yu, 1997). The activation of mGluRs, especially mGluR5 is involved in theinduction of large amplitude or long-lasting late phase LTP of AMPAR-mediated transmissioninduced by strong or repeated stimulation protocols (Anwyl, 2009).

3.4.1.1 Maintenance of LTP

While LTP induction involves enhancement of synaptic efficacy largely by the biochemical

events of E-LTP, the long term maintenance of the potentiated state demands for stable and

self-sustaining biochemical mechanisms. In the dynamic milieu of the cell where most

changes are reversible, stable alterations can be brought about by changes in the size of

molecular pools that are dynamically maintained or by establishment of cyclic pathways

which can maintain themselves. Increased exocytosis of AMPARs to the synaptic membrane

could increase the size of the AMPAR pool in the synapse thereby increasing the response of

the synapse. Phosphorylation of AMPARs leads to an increase in the pool of AMPARs with

increased conductivity. However sustained maintenance of the larger pools requires

adjustments in the kinetics of the pathways that influence these pools. One of the molecules

that had been viewed as a candidate for maintenance of the stable state is CaMKII.

Theoretical analysis indicates that the pool of CaMKII molecules in the special chemical

environment of the PSD acts as a bistable switch. According to this model, the activity level

of kinases and phosphatases determine which kind of synaptic plasticity, LTP or LTD is

induced. A switch of this kind turns on, when a threshold number of Thr 286 sites on the

kinase are phosphorylated. Thr286-autophosphorylation converts CaMKII to an

autonomously active on state. The on state of the switch can last for very long periods,because the kinase acts faster than the PSD phosphatase on Thr286 sites (Lisman, 2002). In the

early phase of LTP, phospho-CaMKII generated will be more due to the fast activity of the

kinase. Activated form of CaMKII can bind to the GluN2B subunit of the NMDAR as

described earlier. This binding leads to saturation of CaMKII at very low concentration of

ATP and thereby stabilizes the activity of the kinase against variations in the concentrations

of ATP at synapses (Pradeep et al., 2009). This binding also leads to reduction in the rates of

the phosphorylation and dephosphorylation reactions, resulting in a reduction in the

amount of ATP consumed while running the simultaneous kinase and phosphatase

reactions. Thereby this biochemical mechanism permits the functioning of the kinase-

www.intechopen.com


11/37


phosphatase switch in an energy efficient manner (Cheriyan et al., 2011). Activated CaMKII

can function in enhancing AMPAR currents and its recruitment. This will contribute to the

maintenance of enhanced AMPAR mediated postsynaptic response.

Fig. 4. CaMKII-phosphatase bistable switch model. Continuous interconversion betweenCaMKII and phospho-CaMKII is catalysed by the kinase activity of Thr286autophosphorylated CaMKII and the phosphatase activity of PP1.

Activated PKA can also contribute to the maintenance of LTP by involving in a self-

sustaining mechanism, in addition to its role in promoting AMPAR exocytosis. As described

earlier, activated PKA can alter gene expression via cAMP-PKA-CREB pathway. One gene

activated by CREB encodes a ubiquitin hydrolase, a component of a specific ubiquitin

protease that leads to the regulated proteolysis of the regulatory subunit of PKA. This

results in persistent activity of PKA, leading to persistent phosphorylation of PKA

substrates such as CREB, MAPK, etc., thereby completing a self-sustaining cycle that can be

stably maintained.3.4.1.2 Synaptic tagging hypothesis

L-LTP requires de novo protein synthesis. The long lasting activity changes require nucleartranscription followed by delivery of newly synthesized proteins to the synapse to yield

synaptic remodeling. Newly synthesized proteins delivered by non-directed transport fromthe cell body must be captured locally at the activated synapse in order to function in an

input-specific manner (Doyle, 2011). For this, the activated synapse requires a local signal

that allows it to capture proteins or mRNAs for protein-synthesis-dependent LTP or LTD.

This process has been termed synaptic tagging. Based on this proposal, synaptic activity

generates a tag, which "captures" the plasticity-related proteins (PRPs) derived outside of

synapses (Lu et al., 2011). These findings indicate a tight and extensive dialogue between thesynapse and the nucleus in both directions.

3.4.1.3 mRNA transport into the dendrites

mRNA localization to the synapses depends on synaptic activity and the mechanism behind

this transport is largely a mystery. This transport mechanism is highly complex and

involves multiple mRNA binding proteins. This process can be divided into different stages,

(1) the presence of cis-acting localization elements (LEs) or zipcodes generally located in the

3-untranslated region (3-UTR) of localized transcripts, (2) the recognition of these signals

by trans-acting RNA-binding proteins (RBPs), (3) the assembly of RBPs and their cargo

www.intechopen.com


12/37


RNAs into transport ribonucleo-protein particles (RNPs) as a functional complex, (4) the

translocation of transport RNPs along the microtubule (MT) cytoskeleton to their final

destination at synapses in a translationally repressed state, (5) the anchoring of these

particles at or underneath activated synapses in a translationally repressed state and finally

(6) the activation of translation of the localized mRNAs (Doyle, 2011).

One of the specific immediately expressed candidate gene is activity-regulated cytoskeleton-

associated protein (Arc). Newly synthesized ArcmRNA is targeted rapidly to synapses that

have recently undergone specific forms of synaptic activity where it is locally translated.

Targeting of Arc mRNA depends on NMDAR activity. An increase in Arc expression

promotes stable expansion of the F-actin network in dendritic spines, which is believed to

underlie morphological enlargement of the synapse and stable LTP (Bramham, 2010).

3.4.1.4 Spine enlargement

Most excitatory synapses in the brain terminate on dendritic spines. Spines are specializedperturbations on dendrites that contain PSD. The PSD includes receptors, channels and

signaling molecules that couple synaptic activity with postsynaptic biochemistry. Spinesprovide a closed compartment that allows rapid changes in the concentrations of signalingmolecules, such as calcium, and hereby make efficient responses to inputs possible. Long-term changes in spine morphology could contribute to the modulation of synaptictransmission that occurs in LTP. Shortening or widening the neck of a spine affects calciuminflux into the dendrite. Spine enlargement depends on the structure of cytoskeletalfilaments. Actin filaments of microfilaments are in close association with PSD.

Reorganization of actin filament contributes to the spine enlargement process in LTP. TheAMPA class of glutamate receptors has been found to have a stabilizing effect on spine

morphology. Rho GTPases and their downstream effectors have an important role inregulating the cytoskeleton, and consequently in regulating spine and dendriticmorphology, in response to extracellular stimulation. AMPAR activation by spontaneousglutamate release at synapses is sufficient to maintain dendritic spines (Lamprecht &LeDoux, 2004).

3.4.1.5 Presynaptic mechanisms

Activation of both pre and postsynaptic sites are necessary for the generation of LTP on thebasis of Hebbian theory. Neurotransmitter release is one of the presynaptic mechanisms

eliciting the induction of LTP. An increase in neuro-transmitter release can be observed

together with the postsynaptic mechanisms. This is due to the activation of presynaptic

terminals by some factors released by the postsynaptic compartment or cell (Williams et al.,

1989). A prominent candidate for such a messenger is arachidonic acid or one of itsmetabolites, because these compounds can readily cross cell membranes. This can be

generated by the degradation of phospholipids by the enzyme phospholipase A2, a calciumdependent enzyme (Bliss, 1990). Nitric oxide (NO) is another retrograde messenger

produced by Ca2+/CaM activated nitric oxide synthase (NOS), which can activate the

synthesis of cyclic GMP presynaptic terminal by activating two NO-sensitive guanylyl

cyclases (NO-GCs) (NO-GC1 and NO-GC2) leading to increased neurotransmitter release.

The physiological consequences of increase in NO/cGMP and the associated cellularmechanisms involved are not well understood.

www.intechopen.com


13/37


3.4.2 NMDAR-independent mechanisms

Although a vast majority of studies of NMDAR dependent LTP have been conducted, thereare also a few mechanisms that are independent of NMDAR that have been studied.

Following section will briefly describe molecular mechanisms of NMDAR independentforms of LTP.

3.4.2.1 200 Hz LTP

NMDAR-independent forms of LTP also can be induced at the Schaffer collateral pathway

in CA1. This allows for a comparison of two different types of LTP at the same synapse.

NMDAR-independent LTP in CA1 can be elicited by use of four and a half seconds, 200 Hz

stimuli separated by five seconds. LTP induced by this stimulation protocol is insensitive to

NMDAR selective antagonist such as APV. 200 Hz LTP was shown to be blocked by

nifedipine (Grover and Teyler, 1990), a voltage gated calcium channel (VGCC) blocker. This

observation led to the conclusion that 200 Hz-LTP stimulation elicits sufficiently large and

prolonged membrane depolarization, resulting in the opening of voltage dependent calciumchannels, to trigger elevation of postsynaptic calcium sufficient to trigger LTP. It is also

reported that L-type Ca2+ channel-dependent synaptic plasticity significantly contributes to

spatial learning in the behaving mouse (Moosmang et al., 2005).

3.4.2.2 Tetra-Ethyl-Ammonium LTP

NMDAR-independent LTP at the Schaffer collateral pathway in CA1 can also be induced bythe bath application of the K+ channel blocker tetraethylammonium (TEA) (TEA-LTP)(Aniksztejn and Ben-Ari, 1991) and is referred to as LTPk. This nonspecific potassiumchannel blocker can cause membrane excitability. Like 200 Hz-LTP, TEA-LTP is insensitive

to NMDAR antagonists, and is blocked by blockade of voltage sensitive calcium channels.The induction of LTPk is dependent on synaptic activity, as its induction is blocked byAMPAR antagonists. Similar to 200 Hz LTP, the current model for TEA-LTP is that synapticdepolarization via glutamate receptor activation, augmented by the hyperexcitablemembrane due to K+ channel blockade, leads to a relatively large and prolonged membranedepolarization. This leads to the triggering of LTP through postsynaptic calcium influx viathe VGCCs.

3.4.2.3 Mossy fiber LTP in CA3

A good model system for studying NMDAR-independent LTP is the mossy fiber inputs intoCA3 pyramidal neurons. The mossy fiber synapses are unique, large synapses with unusual

presynaptic specializations. The mechanism will be described in later section (3.5.).

3.4.3 Chemical LTP (Chem-LTP)

Early protocols for the induction of LTP in cultures of dissociated hippocampal neuronscomprised repetitive high frequency presynaptic stimulation (HFS-LTP) as mentionedabove. In some cases this was coupled with postsynaptic depolarization and in otherscultures were preincubated with blockers of different channels. High frequency stimulationactivates only a small fraction of synapses, making it difficult to detect molecular andcellular changes associated with LTP. Most biochemical analysis and imaging studiesrequire a high proportion of synapses to be potentiated. Therefore, a range of strategies

www.intechopen.com


14/37


were applied to chemically induce LTP (Chem-LTP). Chem-LTP is an alternative to highfrequency stimulation and has the advantage that it can activate all the cells in the culture.One example of Chem-LTP is mentioned below.

3.4.3.1 Forskolin/rolipram-induced LTPForskolin/rolipram-induced LTP was predominantly used in slice cultures; it can also beapplied for dissociated hippocampal neuronal cultures. This form of chemically induced,highly sensitive plasticity state is based on the increase of intracellular cAMP levels by theapplication of the adenylyl cyclase activator forskolin (50 M) and the phosphodiesteraseinhibitor rolipram (0.1 M) in Mg2+ and 2-Cl-adenosine free artificial cerebrospinal fluid for 16min (Otmakhov, 2004). This induction procedure is bypassing the need for synaptic activation,and by raising cAMP concentration directly activates PKA and signaling pathways thatunderlie synaptic plasticity. However, froskolin/rolipram-LTP still require NMDAR activationand involve the recruitment of CaMKII to dendritic spines (Molnar, 2011).

3.5 LTP in other regions of CNS

Although LTP was first described at the perforant path synapses on the neurons of the DG,

subsequently most of the work on the mechanism of LTP is performed on the Schaffer

collateral synapses on the CA1 pyramidal neurons.

In the CA1 region, NMDAR-mediated and NMDAR-independent LTP have been described

and they are expressed mainly as postsynaptic mechanisms. Presynaptic LTP was also

discovered in hippocampus and cerebellum. In hippocampus, presynaptic LTP can be

observed in mossy fiber pathway. There is no need for calcium influx in the postsynaptic

compartment for eliciting this form of LTP and this is NMDAR-independent. In the

induction of presynaptic LTP, presynaptic calcium release is essential. R-type calcium

channels are voltage dependent calcium channels that can mediate presynaptic calcium

release. This calcium influx can activate several signaling pathways needed for the induction

of mossy fiber LTP (MF-LTP). Both pharmacological and genetic analyses indicate that a rise

in presynaptic cAMP is a crucial component. The cAMP level is enhanced by the activation

of Ca2+/CaM activated adenyl cyclase 1 (AC1) and leads to the activation of PKA. This PKA

activation regulates key molecules needed for the enhanced neurotransmitter release

(Nicoll, 2005).

3.5.1 Cerebellar LTP

In cerebellum, parallel fibres (PF) of cerebellar granule cells form synapse with Purkinje cells(PC) of Purkinje cell layer (Fig. 5). When the PF is stimulated at 4-8 Hz for 15 s, a presynapticform of LTP is induced at PF. This shows a similar molecular mechanism as that of themossy fiber pathway in the hippocampus. A postsynaptically expressed form of LTP wasmore recently described and is observed as a reversal of PF-LTD. PFLTP can be induced byrepetitive PF stimulation (1 Hz for 5 minutes) without concomitant CF activation andrequires a lower calcium transient for its induction than PF-LTD (Vogt & Canepari, 2010).PF-LTP generally depends on the activation of phosphatases such as PP1, PP2A, and PP2Band is independent of activity of kinases such as CaMKII and PKC (Jorntell & Hansel, 2006).In cerebellar PCs, GluR1 expression is weak, and the majority of AMPA receptors consist of

www.intechopen.com


15/37


GluR2GluR3 heteromeric complexes. An activity dependent synaptic delivery of GluR2 hasbeen shown during the induction of LTP in PF-PC synapses. This activity driven processinvolves NO-mediated binding of N-ethylmaleimide sensitive factor (NSF) to GluR2. In PFLTP, GluR2 synaptic delivery is also facilitated by dephosphorylation of GluR2 at Ser880.

Fig. 5. Cellular anatomy of the cerebellum. Adapted from Ramnani, 2006

3.5.2 LTP in spinal cord

Spinal LTP has been demonstrated in different areas of the spinal cord. The ventral and thesuperficial dorsal horn, Wide Dynamic Range (WDR) neurons and superficial neurons in thespinal cord that project to the parabrachial area in the brain stem are some of the sites whereLTP has been demonstrated. It has been suggested that the generation of LTP in spinal cordmay be one mechanism, whereby acute pain may be transformed into a chronic pain state.LTP in superficial spinal dorsal horn involves simultaneous activation of multiple receptorslike the NMDAR, the Neurokinin 1 (NK-1) receptor for substance P and mGluRs. This LTPis likely to occur in both the sensory and the affective pain pathways. LTP in deep spinalWDR neurons have a pivotal role in transmission of painful inputs. As with LTP in thesuperficial spinal cord, activation of the ionotrophic glutamate receptors (AMPA andNMDA subtypes) and the NK1 receptor seems crucial for the induction of LTP in deepWDR neurons (Rygh et al, 2005).

www.intechopen.com


16/37


4. Long term depression

LTD is an activity dependent reduction in the efficacy of neuronal synapses. It can generally

last for hours or longer. It brings about a long lasting decrease in synaptic strength. LTD can

be defined as a long lasting decrease in the synaptic response of neurons to stimulation oftheir afferents following a long patterned stimulus (Collingrigde et al., 2010). LTD is

generally considered as a reversal of LTP as it is understood that if synapses continue to

increase in strength, eventually they would reach some level of maximum efficacy whichmight cause saturation and then they may be unable to encode new information. This would

result in neurons coming to a stage of complete inactivity or over activity. LTD is also

considered to be the initial step in synaptic elimination (Bastrikova et al., 2008; Beckner et

al., 2008) as it is known that those synapses which lose their efficacy are eliminated.

4.1 Types of LTD

LTD can be either homosynaptic or heterosynaptic. Homosynaptic LTD is induced by aconditioning input. It is input specific. It is restricted to the individual synapse which isactivated by a low frequency stimulus (LFS) i.e., it happens in the same synapse thatreceives the induction. It is associative and it correlates with postsynaptic activation of theneuron by an active presynaptic neuron. Homosynaptic LTD is in turn of two types. LTDwhich follows an LTP is often known as depotentiation. If LTD is observed from base lineconditions, with low frequency stimulus, then it is de novo LTD. Heterosynaptic LTD refersto depression at synapses neighboring the activated ones but are not directly activatedthemselves (Abraham et al., 2007). Heterosynaptic LTD occurs at synapses that are notpotentiated. It occurs consequent to a non-conditioning input in association with either LTPor LTD. LTD relies on both pre and postsynaptic expression mechanisms although the

maintenance mechanism is not fully understood (Bliss and Cooke, 2011).

4.2 LTD in Hippocampus

Unlike LTP, LTD in hippocampus occurs when the postsynaptic cells are weakly

depolarized, whereas LTP induction involves strong postsynaptic depolarization. The

hippocampal LTD is governed by BCM (Bienenstock Cooper Munro) theory (Bienenstock etal., 1982). It says that the synapses that are active when the postsynaptic cells are weakly

polarized undergo LTD. If APs preceed EPSPs, LTD results; i.e., unpaired stimulation causes

lower calcium signals and therefore LTD.

In the CA1 region LTD is homosynaptic, and depends on NMDARs and on proteinsynthesis but in the DG, it is independent of NMDARs and protein synthesis and is foundboth as heterosynaptic and homosynaptic forms (Kemp and Vaughan, 2007).

The best understood type of LTD is induced in hippocampal area CA1 by LFS via an NMDARdependent rise in postsynaptic intracellular calcium and the activation of a protein

phosphatase cascade which will be discussed hereforth. A brief application of NMDA can alsolead to depression, i.e., a form of chem-LTD. LTD is triggered by postsynaptic calcium entry,like LTP, after activation by presynaptic stimulus. The main receptors involved are AMPARand NMDAR. If the postsynaptic depolarization by AMPAR is weak, it cannot activateNMDARs completely. The partial removal of Mg2+ block results in reduced Ca2+ entry.

www.intechopen.com


17/37


Therefore instead of kinases, phosphatases get activated as they require comparatively lowerCa2+ concentrations for activation. The protein phosphatase activated is PP2B or calcineurin.PP2B can in turn activate PP1. PP2B dephosphorylates and inactivates Inhibitor-1. This relievesthe inhibition of PP1 by Inhibitor-1 thereby activating it (Mulkey et al., 1993).

In hippocampus, plasticity is mediated by conductance changes of AMPARs which are in turnregulated by phosphorylation. The majority of AMPARs at hippocampal synapses areGluR1/GluR2 and GluR2/GluR3 heteromers. The trafficking of GluR1 plays a dominant rolein plasticity. Activated PP1 brings about dephosphorylation of GluR1 at Ser845 (Fig. 6) andpromotes AMPAR internalization (Lee et al., 2000). Inhibition of PP2B blocks GluR1internalization and thereby LTD, suggesting the importance of phosphatase activity in LTD(Beattie et al., 2000). Targeting PP1 precisely to synapses upon NMDAR activation is crucial forLTD expression and is facilitated by PP1 binding proteins like spinophilin, neurabin, etc.(Morshita et al., 2001). In hippocampus, AMPARs are stabilized on the membrane by NSF andclathrin adaptor protein AP2, which bind to the NSF binding site on GluR2. During NMDAR-

LTD, AP2 replaces NSF and this initiates AMPAR endocytosis. Clathrin mediated endocytosisof AMPARs is triggered by a neuronal calcium sensor known as hippocalcin. Upon activation,hippocalcin translocates to the plasma membrane, where it forms a complex with AP2 andGluR2 and initiates clathrin mediated AMPAR endocytosis. Protein interacting with C-kinase1 (PICK1) is another protein that binds directly to GluR2 and it can also bind to PKC. PICK1competes with AMPAR binding protein (ABP) and glutamate receptor interacting protein(GRIP) for binding to C-terminal of GluR2 and promotes internalization. PICK1 also helps inmodifying neuronal architecture by interacting with F-actin. PP2B interacts with A-kinaseanchor protein-150 (AKAP-150) which in turn interacts with PSD-95. PSD-95 further interactswith NMDAR thereby positioning PP2B near NMDAR (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). This helpsin the activation of PP2B by Ca2+ influx through NMDARs. Activated PP2B can mediate theNMDAR-induced endocytosis of AMPARs that underlies one major form of LTD. Disruptionof the interaction between PSD-95 and AKAP-150 strongly inhibited NMDAR-dependentendocytosis of AMPARs (Bhattacharya et al., 2009). Phosphorylation of Ser295 of PSD-95 occursin vivo, and it enhances the ability of PSD-95 to accumulate in the PSD, to recruit surfaceAMPA receptors, and to strengthen synaptic transmission. During LTD, PSD-95 isdephosphorylated at Ser295 facilitating its removal from PSD. This mechanism also plays a rolein the NMDAR-dependent endocytosis of AMPAR (Kim et al., 2007).

Although a major form of LTD is mediated by NMDARs, the ultimate direction of change in

synaptic efficacy is brought about by changes in AMPAR function (Collingridge et al., 2010).

Calcium influx through the NMDAR is central to the induction of both LTP and LTD

because intracellular application of calcium chelators, such as BAPTA or EGTA, preventsinduction of plasticity. Since induction of LTP and LTD are controlled by the postsynaptic

NMDAR, any presynaptic component of expression requires a retrograde messenger that

can signal to the presynaptic terminal that coincidence has occurred. Two candidates are

nitric oxide (NO) and endocannabinoids (eCB) (Bliss & Cook, 2011). N-

arachidonylethanolamine (AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) are two major eCBs

that activate type I cannabinoid receptors (CB1) receptors on the presynaptic neuron in the

brain (Di Marzo et al., 1998). Upon stimulation, eCBs are released from postsynaptic

neurons and travel across the synaptic cleft to activate CB1 on presynaptic terminals,

resulting in depression of synaptic transmission.

www.intechopen.com


18/37


Fig. 6. Mechanisms of LTD induction in hippocampus and cerebellum. Key signalingpathways that lead to LTD in hippocampus and in cerebellum involve AMPAR regulation.

Hippocampal LTD involves activation of phosphatases like PP2B and PP1 whichdephosphorylate GluR1 resulting in reduced AMPAR conductance, whereas in cerebellum,kinases like CaMKII and PKC are activated resulting in GluR2 phosphorylation and therebycausing AMPAR endocytosis and reduced current.

Of the NMDARs, GluN2B containing NMDARs are supposed to be important for LTD

especially in hippocampus as a study using conditional knockout mice showed that the

selective ablation of GluN2B subunits in pyramidal neurons in CA1 specifically impairs CA1

NMDAR-LTD. This also results in deficits in several hippocampal dependent learning and

memory tasks, providing strong evidence for a key role of this particular from of LTD in

memory formation. (Brigman et al., 2010; Collingridge et al., 2010). BDNF is released from

glutamatergic neurons in response to high frequency stimulus and is found to have a role inLTP. While BDNF affects synaptic potentiation at hippocampal synapses, proBDNF is

involved in LTD. proBDNF, by activating its receptor known as the p75 neurotrophin

receptor (p75NTR ), facilitates hippocampal (LTD). Deletion of p75NTR-/- in mice selectively

impaired the NMDAR dependent LTD, without affecting other forms of synaptic plasticity.

p75NTR-/- mice also showed a decrease in the expression of GluN2B, an NMDA receptor

subunit uniquely involved in LTD. p75NTR-/- mice showed a decrease in the expression of

GluN2B in the hippocampus and also a marked reduction in GluN2B-mediated currents at

the CA1 synapse. Activation of p75NTR by proBDNF enhanced GluN2B dependent LTD and

GluN2B mediated synaptic currents. (Woo et al., 2005).

www.intechopen.com


19/37


The events described above depict the importance of GluN2B subunit in LTD. It is also

known that CaMKII can phosphorylate GluN2B at Ser1303, both in vitro and in vivo

(Omkumar et al., 1996). This phosphorylation prevents the binding of CaMKII to GluN2B in

vitro (Strack et al., 2000; O'Leary et al., 2011). Studies from our lab have shown that the

phosphorylation status at Ser1303 enables GluN2B to distinguish between the Ca2+/CaMactivated form and autonomously active Thr286-autophosphorylated form of CaMKII. This

highlights the need for a dephosphorylation mechanism at GluN2B-Ser1303. It has been

shown that phosphatases in PSD can dephosphorylate GluN2B-Ser1303 (Rajeevkumar et al.,

2009). Although the physiological role of GluN2B-Ser1303 is not known to date, it is likely to

be involved in LTD mechanism as phosphatases get activated during induction of LTD.

Another major form of LTD worth mentioning is the one which is dependent on group 1

metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR). Chemical LTD is typically induced by activation

of mGlu receptors. The most commonly induced chemical LTD is by (S)-3, 5-

dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG), an agonist of mGluR, one which is effective even in the

absence of Ca2+. Normally mGluR-LTD is induced in CA1 synapses by a train of LFS

consisting of single pulses. The mGluR antagonist -methyl-4-caboxyphenylglycine (MCPG)

blocked depotentiation and denovo LTD in CA1 showing the involvement of mGluR in LTD

(Bolshakow et al., 1994).

Glutamate binding to mGluR initiates a signaling cascade, involving the breakdown of the

membrane lipid PIP2 (Phosphoinositol 4, 5 - bisphosphate) by phospholipase C (PLC) to the

important signaling molecules IP3 (Inositol 1, 4, 5 - triphosphate). This also causes release of

diacylglycerol (DAG) and calcium mobilization. This leads to the activation of the calcium

sensitive kinase, PKC. This enzyme then phosphorylates AMPAR but in such a manner that

the conductance is reduced (Bliss et al., 2011). An offshoot is the production of NO, theretrograde messenger. Group I mGluRs (mGluR1/5) activate PLC, leading to Ca2+

mobilization, and activation of the ERKMAPK pathway through which they modulate

signals of synapse-to-nucleus communication and triggers protein synthesis. mGluR1 and

mGluR2 receptor subtypes mediate de novo LTD at cerebellar PF-PC synapses and

hippocampal mossy fibre synapses respectively.

mGluRs are the critical regulators of activity-dependent protein synthesis in dendrites.

Signaling by mGluR1/5 is critical to synaptic circuitry formation during development and isimplicated in LTD (Zukin et al., 2009). mGluR1/5 elicit synapse specific modifications in

synaptic strength and spine morphology by stimulating rapid local translation of dendritic

mRNAs including Fmr1, that encodes fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP) (Greenoughet al., 2001). Expression of mGluR-LTD at Schaffer collateral to CA1 pyramidal cell synapses is

mediated by persistent internalization of AMPARs and in adolescent mice requires de novo

protein synthesis (Huber et al., 2000; Snyder et al., 2001). But mGluR-LTD at cortical synapses

(Desai et al., 2006) requires neither local protein synthesis nor FMRP function. mGluR-LTD isalso seen in CA1 in neonates and is protein synthesis dependent. (Nosyreva & Huber, 2005).

PICK1 is also required for mGluR-LTD at different synapses. mGluRs are associated with

protein tyrosine phosphatases rather than Ser/Thr ones. DHPG, a potent agonist of mGluR,

induced LTD that involves tyrosine dephosphorylation of GluA2 and is associated with

AMPARs endocytosis (Gladding et al., 2009). DHPG-induced LTD appears not to require

www.intechopen.com


20/37


extracellular Ca2+ (Fitzjohn et al., 2001). It also doesnt require CaMKII. Certain other

proteins which are activated by mGluRs are arg 3.1(Arc), striatal-enriched protein tyrosine

phosphatase (STEP) and microtubule associated protein 1B which are involved in AMPAR

internalization (Collingridge et al., 2010).

4.3 LTD in cerebellum

Cerebellum is involved in motor learning and non-declarative memory. It is required in theadaptation of vestibulo ocular reflex (VOR) movements of the eyes needed to keep theretinal image stable. In the 1980s, Ito and colleagues provided the first experimentalevidence for plasticity in the cerebellar cortex.

Of the three layers of cerebellum; the molecular layer, granular layer and the Purkinje layer,

the Purkinje cells synapse on deep cerebellar nuclei which are the major output from the

cerebellum (Bear et al., 2001). Purkinje cells modify the output. Purkinje cells receive

excitatory input from two sources, viz, climbing fibre (CF) and parallel fibre (PF). EachPurkinje cell receives input from one inferior olive cell (which arises from medulla) via CF

and this input is very powerful. This generates a very large EPSP that always strongly

activates the postsynaptic Purkinje cells. The other input to the Purkinje cells, viz the PF

arises from cerebellar granule (CG) cells. The CG cells in turn receive mossy fibres which

arise from precerebellar nuclei. Purkinje cells receive synapses from more than one PF. The

plasticity at PF-PC synapse is governed by Marr Albus (Marr, 1969; Albus, 1971) theory

which explains the mechanism behind motor learning. It says that the plasticity of the PF

synapse is effective if it is active at the same time as the CF input to the Purkinje cell.

Activating CF results in massive calcium influx. Despite the large calcium influx, paired CF

and PF stimulation results in LTD in Purkinje cells (Ito et al., 1982), whereas PF stimulationalone causes LTP (Lev Ram et al., 2002).

CF stimulation results in large input of EPSP. As a result voltage gated sodium channelsopen causing massive depolarization. This activates VGCCS, facilitating calcium entry. At

the same time, the activation of PF results in glutamate release which binds to AMPA

receptor and allows sodium ion entry. Altering AMPAR affects synaptic efficacy bychanging the channel density. The other receptor activated is mGluR. It activates the release

of downstream second messengers such as DAG and results in activation of PKC. CaMKII

is also activated along with PKC (Hansel, 2006). These kinases can phosphorylate the

AMPAR. PKC can phosphorylate GluR2, the subunit of AMPAR at Ser-880 and this brings

about receptor endocytosis (Chung et al., 2003). It is a critical event in the induction ofcerebellar LTD (Fig. 6). This phosphorylation disrupts the binding of GluR2 to GRIP1facilitating binding to PICK1 (Xia et al., 2000). Purkinje cells are enriched with GluR2/GluR3

receptors whereas it is poor in expressing GluR1 subunits. Purkinje cells lack NMDAR and

thus LTD is mainly AMPAR mediated. The cerebellar LTD is the type of plasticity where

information is stored as a decrease in the effectiveness of synaptic connection.

It is interesting to see that the LTP and LTD induction cascades in hippocampus and

cerebellar Purkinje synapses are different and exhibit a mirror image like relationship

(Jorntell & Hansel, 2006). As already discussed, LTD in cerebellum, is being brought about

by kinases whereas in hippocampus it is brought about by phosphatases.

www.intechopen.com


21/37


4.4 LTD induction

LTD can be induced by prolonged periods of LFS by pairing baseline synaptic stimulation

with depolarization i.e. normally at a frequency of 10 Hz. LFS of 1 Hz for 15 minutes brings

about LTD in CA1 area of hippocampus of anaesthetized rabbit (Bliss & Lomo, 1973). Thisstimulation is preceded by baseline stimulation at frequencies such as 0.10.05 Hz to

establish a reference level for basal synaptic transmission. Electrically induced LTD is

typically generated by low frequency stimulation (in the range of 13 Hz) given for

prolonged periods of time (515 min) (Braunewell et al., 2001). Coincident EPSPs with action

potentials (APs) evokes large calcium signals and leads to LTP whereas unpaired

stimulation brings about LTD (Markram et al., 1997). LTD, like LTP possess the

characteristics of longevity, input-specificity and associativity. The relative contributions of

pre and postsynaptic mechanisms may vary at different times after induction and also

across different classes of synapses. In cerebellum, PF-LTD can be induced by paired PF and

CF stimulation (Ito et al., 1982), which is typically applied at 14 Hz for 5 min.

4.5 Physiological functions of LTD

Elucidating the functional role of LTD in vivo has been challenging due to difficulty of

inducing it in vivo and due to the lack of selective inhibitors for the same (Collingridge et al.,

2010). But still some of the physiological functions of LTD are known.

LTD has been implicated in cerebellar motor learning. For example, studies using PKC

transgenic mice showed that chronic PKC inhibition restricted to cerebellar PF-PC synapses

exhibited compromised LTD and defective adaptation of VOR. But still a causal relationship

remains to be demonstatred between PF-PC LTD and motor learning (De Zeeuw et al.,

1998). To the contrary, recent studies using knockout mice which target the expression ofPF-PC LTD by blocking internalization of AMPARs show that LTD is not necessary for

motor learning. The mutant mice lacked PF-PC LTD but had no difficulty in performing

motor learning skills like VOR adaptation, eyeblink conditioning, and locomotion learning

on the Erasmus Ladder which covers a wide range of cerebellar learning behaviors

(Schonewille et al., 2011).

LTD is implicated in hippocampus dependent learning because of its property of

depotentiation. Depotentiation in CA1 and DG has been shown when rats explore a novel

environment or a familiar environment containing novel objects. Impairment of reversal

learning in water maze was found to be associated with severely impaired hippocampal

LTD in dopamine transporter knockout mice. LTD is also involved in learning regarding

novelty detection. In freely moving rats, LTD is facilitated during exploration of complex

environments containing novel objects (Collingridge et al., 2010).

The various molecular mechanisms involved in LTD in brain have been discussed. LTD has

been implicated in several physiological processes including learning and memory and also

in development of visual system. Future studies will be focused on the aspects of protein

synthesis and turnover involved in LTD in detail. Also the mechanisms by which LTD could

be induced by neurotransmitters other than glutamate remains to be elucidated.

(Collingridge et al., 2010).

www.intechopen.com


22/37


Fig. 7. Scheme of shared post synaptic signaling pathways leading to LTP and LTD

5. Synaptic plasticity and disease

In disease conditions, aberrant synaptic plasticity or any defect in signaling mechanism maycause substantial deficits in different aspects of central nervous system. The role of synapticplasticity in disease is becoming more evident across a wide range of CNS disorders.Understanding the molecular basis of normal and diseased plasticity will provide a platformto study the molecular basis of many of the diseases and to target drugs on plasticity relatedmolecules to treat many of the CNS disorders. Cognitive deficits are the early symptoms thatappear much before the onset of neuritic dystrophy and pathology. Often, it is likely that theimmediate consequence of aberrant signaling could be impairment of synaptic plasticity. Thiswould later develop into synaptic and neuronal loss. Thus plasticity related mechanisms couldhave the advantage of being targets for early therapeutic intervention in CNS disorders.

Among the CNS disorders such as Alzheimers disease (AD), schizophrenia, epilepsy and indisorders associated with learning disabilities where there are alterations of synapticplasticity, Alzheimers disease has been extensively studied.

5.1 Alzheimers disease

Hippocampus, amygdala, neocortex, anterior thalamus, entrohinal, and transentrohinalcortices are some of the areas affected in Alzheimers disease (Sweatt, 2010). Synapse loss

www.intechopen.com


23/37


that starts even at early stages of AD, results in a condition where minimum number ofsynapses are not available for cortical networks and impairment of synaptic plasticityoccurs. The neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimers disease are the presence ofintracellular neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) composed of hyperphosphorylated tau protein

and extracellular neuritic plaques composed of amyloid protein (A) (Montoya, 2011). Ais produced by the sequential cleavage of amyloid precursor protein (APP) by -secretaseand -secretase (Haass & Selkoe, 1993). 40-residue A (A40) and 42-residue A (A42) arethe most common isoforms of A (Xia, 2010). Even before plaques could be observed,significant deficits in synaptic transmission have been detected by electrophysiologicalrecordings from the hippocampus of transgenic mice over expressing APP (Hsia et al., 1999;Mucke et al., 2000). Thus aberrations in synaptic function are the early events followed bythe formation of plaques and NFT (Funato et al., 1999; Hartl et al., 2008; Selkoe, 2002; Walsh& Selkoe, 2004, as cited in Proctor et al., 2011).

5.1.1 Disruption of the plasticity of glutamatergic synaptic transmission

The alterations of synaptic plasticity which happens before synaptic loss may be initiatingneurodegeneration. The spatial working memory and LTP were normal in youngAPP695SWE transgenic mice. There was reduction in LTP and deficits in behaviouralperformance with aged transgenic mice. The deterioration of LTP in dentate gyrus and CA1and behavioural deficit appear in a correlated manner (Chapman et al., 1999). A

concentrations increased with age. Many lines of investigations show that oligomeric formsof A species interfere with synaptic plasticity, inhibit LTP and impairs maintenance of LTP(Barghorn et al., 2005; Klyubin et al., 2008; Shankar et al., 2008; Walsh et al., 2002; Wang etal., 2002; Stephan et al., 2001). A peptide when applied before and during HFS inhibits LTP

induction in the dentate medial perforant path and Schaffer colllateral-CA1 pathway (Chenet al., 2000; Chen et al., 2002). The basal synaptic transmission or short-term synapticplasticity remained intact. A inhibits maintenance phase of L-LTP and also inhibits proteinsynthesis in the L-LTP phase when applied after HFS. The effects of A on the induction ofLTP and on L-LTP are independent of each other, working through multiple mechanisms(Chen et al., 2002). Different forms of LTP affected by A will be reflected as deficits indifferent phases of memory and also at a concentration of A, below that is required to

produce neurotoxicity (Chen et al., 2002).

5.1.2 Molecular events causing disruption of LTP

A was shown to increase intracellular Ca2+ concentrations due to potentiation of currentsthrough L-type Ca2+ channels (Ueda et al., 1997) and blockade of fast-inactivating K+channels that leads to prolonged membrane depolarization and Ca2+ influx (Good et al.,1996). Basal synaptic transmission and NMDAR-dependent forms of LTP are impaired inthe aging hippocampus (Foster & Norris, 1997), which correlates with deficits in spatialmemory (Barnes & McNaughton, 1985; Diana et al., 1995). A induced Ca2+ transientsactivate calcineurin and cause desensitization of NMDAR channels, reducing Ca2+ influxthrough these channels during LTP-inducing stimulus protocol. As a result induction ofNMDAR-dependent forms of LTP, E-LTP and also L-LTP are suppressed (Chen et al., 2002).A also inhibited NMDAR mediated EPSCs. Activated calcineurin could impair themechanisms underlying the components of L-LTP and long-term memory. This could be

www.intechopen.com


24/37


related to early signs of memory deficits of AD. Under the influence of A oligomers,activation of ERK, MAPK, CaMKII and Akt/PKB were reduced during LTP (Selkoe, 2008;Zeng et al., 2010). In Alzheimers disease mouse models, erratic regulation ofArc expressionleads to synaptic dysfunction (Shepherd & Bear, 2011).

NMDAR dependent neocortical plasticity deficits were observed in AD patients (Battaglia etal., 2007). Nanomolar concentrations of A reduced the NMDAR-mediated EPSCs inhippocampal slices (Li et al., 2009; Cerpa et al., 2010, as cited in Hu et al., 2011). In APPtransgenic mice, there is lower level of cell surface NMDA receptors. Hence, A peptide maybe promoting the endocytosis of NMDA receptors. NMDA receptor endocytosis also requires-7-nicotinic receptors (nAChRs), PP2B and the STEP tyrosine phosphatase. Autopsy tissues ofAD patients show a reduction in the NMDAR subunit levels. PP2B is activated, when Aoligomers bind and activate -7-nicotinic receptors. Tyrosine phosphatase STEP is activated byPP2B-mediated dephosphorylation. Dephosphorylation of Y1472 of GluN2B by the activatedSTEP removes NMDAR from surface. In both AD transgenic mouse models and in the brains

of AD subjects increased levels of STEP were detected (Chin et al., 2005; Kurup et al., 2010, ascited in Proctor et al., 2011). A induced changes in LTP could be due to disruption ofplasticity mechanism as a result of NMDAR changes. Postsynaptic protein tyrosine kinaseEphB2, a regulator of NMDAR trafficking, is cleaved on binding to A and this promotes theremoval of synaptic NMDARs (Ciss et al., 2011). Stimulation of inducible nitric oxidesynthase (iNOS), superoxide production and activation of microglia, all by A, may alsoinhibit NMDAR dependent LTP (Wang et al., 2004). The density of dendritic spines decreaseand the active synapses are reduced when exposed to physiological concentration of A.Electrophysiological experiments show that decrease in spine density can be correlated to theloss of excitatory synapses (Selkoe, 2008). A requires the activity of NMDA receptors to bringabout morphological changes of the dendrite (Shankar et al., 2007).

An increase in A concentration can decrease AMPA receptor-mediated EPSCs or fieldEPSPs. A binds to GluA2 containing AMPA receptors and causes the endocytosis ofAMPARs in a clathrin-dependent, calcineurin and densin mediated pathway (Liu et al.,2010, as cited in Hu et al., 2011). High concentrations of A also induce phosphorylation ofGluA2-Ser880 by PKC and subsequent internalization of the receptor. Caspase-3 cleavage of

calcineurin facilitates postsynaptic GluA1 dephosphorylation and internalization in thecultured hippocampal neurons from transgenic mouse. This observation was supplementedby hippocampal-dependent contextual fear conditioning (CFC) deficit shown by transgenicAD mouse model and an alteration in basic glutamatergic synaptic transmission andenhanced LTD. The reduced AMPAR-mediated currents are associated with the lower

number of AMPAR at the synapse (D'Amelio et al., 2011). The trafficking and anchoring ofAMPA and NMDA receptors are disturbed by hyperphosphorylated tau also (Hoover et al.,2010, as cited in Hu et al., 2011).

A is found to be attached to hippocampal neurons and its presence could be seen ondendritic surfaces (Gong et al., 2003). Synapse elimination associated with decrease in size ofthe synapse can be linked with degradation of the PSD proteinaceous network (Gong &Lippa, 2010). The number and compartmentalization of NMDA and AMPA receptors inPSD are determined by PSD-95, and other scaffolding proteins. PSD-95 and SAP102 arefound to be altered in the susceptible regions of AD brain (Gylys et al., 2004; Leuba et al.,2008a, 2008b, as cited in Proctor et al., 2011). The lower levels of NMDA and AMPA

www.intechopen.com


25/37


receptors can be due to the depletion of PSD-95 from PSD, altering interactions betweenglutamate receptors and scaffolding proteins. This could possibly be one of the mechanismsleading to the disruption of LTP. AMPA receptors are removed from the synapse by bindingto scaffolding protein AKAP-150 and PSD-95 (Bhattacharyya et al., 2009, as cited in Proctor

et al., 2011) as seen in LTD. In APP transgenic mouse model loss of AMPARs are seen. Thechanges in LTP, integrity of spine and reduced NMDAR expression could all be due to theA induced disruption in AMPAR trafficking and expression, as AMPAR regulation isimportant for NMDAR-dependent LTP (Proctor et al., 2011).

Elevated A blocks neuronal glutamate uptake at synapse, the outcome of which is an

increased glutamate at synaptic cleft (Li et al., 2009). This may lead to the activation of extra

or perisynaptic NMDAR promoting LTD. The activation of perisynaptic mGluRs may also

be involved in the facilitation of LTD by A. The pathway for A induced LTD induction

involves an initial synaptic activation of NMDAR by glutamate followed by synaptic

NMDAR desensitization, NMDAR and AMPAR internalization, and activation of

perisynaptic NMDARs and mGluRs (Hsieh et al., 2006; Li et al., 2009, as cited in Palop andMucke, 2010). In patients with Alzheimers disease, glycogen synthase kinase (GSK3)

deregulation due to its increased expression causes reactivation of NMDAR-LTD, which

leads to synaptic loss (Collingridge et al., 2010). Hence A induced LTP deficits seem to

depend on activation of LTD pathways.

In the dentate gyrus, at medial perforant path synapses on the dentate granule cells, paired-

pulse facilitation (PPF) and LTP are impaired in mouse transgenic model of AD (Palop et al.,

2007; Harris et al., 2010). Tau reduction eliminates abnormalities in synaptic transmission

and plasticity in hippocampal subfields of hAPPJ20 mice (Palop et al., 2007; Harris et al.,

2010; Roberson et al., 2011). Phosphorylation of tau by GSK3 modulates the pathway by

which A exerts its pathogenic downstream effects on LTP. This is similar to the A

mediated neurodegeneration (Tackenberg & Brandt, 2009). The absence of tau prevents the

synaptic dysfunction induced by A (Shipton et al., 2011).

5.2 Synaptic plasticity and other diseases

Other diseases conditions where impairments in synaptic plasticity were observed are

schizophrenia, Fragile X Syndrome (Lauterborn et al., 2007; Connor et al., 2011, as cited in

Kumar, 2011), Parkinsons disease (Bagetta et al., 2010, as cited in Kumar, 2011), Down

syndrome (Costa and Grybko, 2005; Siarey et al., 2005, as cited in Kumar, 2011), Rett

syndrome (Moretti et al., 2006; Weng et al., 2011, as cited in Kumar, 2011), Huntingtonsdisease (Usdin et al., 1999; Murphy et al., 2000; Lynch et al., 2007, as cited in Kumar, 2011),

NiemannPick disease type C (Zhou et al., 2011, as cited in Kumar, 2011), RubinsteinTaybi

syndrome (Alarcon et al., 2004, as cited in Kumar, 2011), brain inflammation (Min et al.,

2009; Lynch, 2010, as cited in Kumar, 2011), glioma (Wang et al., 2010, as cited in Kumar,

2011) and diabetes (Biessels et al., 1996; Kamal et al., 1999, 2000, 2005; Valastro et al., 2002;

Artola et al., 2005; Artola, 2008, as cited in Kumar, 2011).

Schizophrenia is caused by abnormal synaptic regulation. Six genes identified forschizophrenia (Harrison & Weinberger, 2005) encode for proteins involved in synapticplasticity and its modulation (Stephan, 2006). Neurophysiological studies have reported in

www.intechopen.com


26/37


vivo disturbances of cortical plasticity and excitability in schizophrenia patients. Pairedassociative stimulation (PAS) induced LTP-like plasticity was disrupted and these plasticitydeficits were indicated to be caused by NMDAR abnormalities in schizophrenia patients(Frantseva et al., 2008). Dysfunction of glutamatergic transmission is associated with the

pathophysiological state in schizophrenia and this will lead to disturbed plasticity andneurotoxicity (Hasan et al., 2011; Konradi and Heckers, 2003; Paz, 2008).

Hippocampal LTP in CA1 area was greatly reduced in epilepsy. This reduction wasassociated with altered dendritic morphology and reduced hippocampal non-spatialmemory seen in epileptic mouse model (Sgobio et al., 2010). The composition of ionotropicglutamate receptors in the PSD was found to be altered in brain areas where seizure activityis more pronounced (Wyneken et al., 2003). Application of low frequency stimulation todepoteniate the hyperexcitable synapses were found to be effective in epileptic patients(Tergau et al., 1999).

In drug addiction and fear conditioning related to post traumatic stress disorder, normalLTP and learning are responsible for the undesired condition (Mahan and Ressler, 2011).The impairment of hippocampus-dependent memory retrieval under acute stress conditionis mediated by hippocampal LTD (Collingridge et al., 2010). In Fragile X syndrome (FXS),FMRP, is mutated and acts as a negative regulator of Arc translation. The dysregulatedexpression of Arc may alter plasticity (Shepherd & Bear, 2011).

A plethora of information thus provide concrete evidence that impairment of synapticplasticity in diseases can contribute to decline in learning and memory.

6. Conclusion

Although a great deal has been learnt regarding the mechanisms that operate duringsynaptic plasticity, a complete description of the molecular basis of synaptic plasticity thatunderlies higher brain functions such as learning and memory is yet to be accomplished.While there is strong experimental support for changes in AMPAR activity as a major postsynaptic mechanism supporting plasticity at synapses, the role of presynaptic mechanismsis less understood. The diversity in the mechanisms across different brain regions and acrossdifferent species is a major challenge towards providing a mechanistic explanation ofsynaptic plasticity. Understanding the deviations in synaptic plasticity mechanisms indiseases may reveal new targets for the early therapeutic intervention in CNS disorders.

7. References

Abraham, W. C., Logan, B., Greenwood, J. M. & Dragunow, M. (2002). Induction andexperience-dependent consolidation of stable long-term potentiation lastingmonths in the hippocampus.J. Neurosci., Vol.22, No.21, pp. 9626-34.

Abraham, W. C., Logan, B., Wolf, A. & Benuskova, L. (2007). Heterosynaptic LTD in theDentate Gyrus of Anesthetized Rat Requires Homosynaptic Activity. J.Neurophysiol., Vol.98, pp. 10481051.

Albus, J. S. (1971). A theory of cerebellar function.Math. Biosci. Vol.10, pp. 25-61.Aniksztejn, L. & Ben-Ari, Y. (1991). Novel form of long-term potentiation produced by a K+

channel blocker in the hippocampus. Nature, Vol.349, No.6304, pp. 67-9.

www.intechopen.com


27/37


Anwyl, R. (2009). Metabotropic glutamate receptor-dependent long-term potentiation.Neuropharmacology, Vol.56, No. 4, pp.735-40.

Barghorn, S., Nimmrich, V., Striebinger, A., Krantz, C., Keller, P., Janson, B., Bahr, M.,Schmidt, M., Bitner, R. S, Harlan, J., Barlow, E., Ebert, U. & Hillen, H. (2005).

Globular amyloid beta-peptide oligomera homogenous and stableneuropathological protein in Alzheimers disease.J. Neurochem., Vol.95, pp834847.

Barnes, C. A. & McNaughton, B. L. (1985). An age comparison of the rates of acquisition andforgetting spatial information in relation to long-term enhancement ofhippocampal synapses. Behavioral Neuroscience, Vol.99, pp. 10401048.

Barria, A. & Malinow, R. (2005). NMDA receptor subunit composition controls synapticplasticity by regulating binding to CaMKII. Neuron,Vol.48, pp. 289-301.

Barria, A., Muller, D., Derkach, V., Griffith, L. C. & Soderling, T. R. (1997b). Regulatoryphosphorylation of AMPA-type glutamate receptors by CaM-KII during long-termpotentiation. Science, Vol.276, No.5321, pp. 2042-5.

Bashir, Z. I., Jane, D. E., Sunter, D. C., Watkins, J. C. & Collingridge, G. L. (1993).Metabotropic glutamate receptors contribute to the induction of long-termdepression in the CA1 region of the hippocampus. Eur. J. Parmacol., Vol.239, No.1-3,pp. 265-6.

Bastrikova, N., Gardner, G. A., Reece, J. M., Jeromin, A. & Dudek, S. M. (2008). Synapseelimination accompanies functional plasticity in hippocampal neurons. Proc. Natl.Acad. Sci., U S A., Vol.105, pp. 31233127.

Battaglia, F., Wang, H. Y., Ghilardi, M. F., Gashi, E., Quartarone, A., Friedman, E. & Nixon,R. A. (2007). Cortical plasticity in Alzheimers disease in humans and rodents. Biol.Psychiatr., Vol.62, pp. 14051412, ISSN 0006-3223.

Bear, M. F., Connors, B. W. & Paradiso, M. A. (2001). Neuroscience Exploring the Brain,

(secondedition), Lippincott, Williams andWilkins, 0-683-30596-4, USA.Beattie, E. C., Carroll, R. C., Yu, X., Morishita, W., Yasuda, H., von Zastrow, M. & Malenka,

R.C. (2000). Regulation of AMPA receptor endocytosis by a signaling mechanismshared with LTD. Nat. Neurosci., Vol.3, pp. 12911300.

Becker, N., Wierenga, C. J., Fonseca, R., Bonhoeffer, T. & Ngerl, U. V. (2008). LTD inductioncauses morphological changes of presynaptic boutons and reduces their contactswith spines. Neuron, Vol.60, pp. 590597.

Bhattacharya, S., Biou, V., Xu, W., Shluter, O. & Malenka, R. C. (2009). A critical role forPSD-95/AKAP interactions in endocytosis of synaptic AMPA receptors. Nat.Neurosci., Vol.12, Issue 2, pp. 172-181.

Bienestock, E. L., Cooper, L. N. & Munro, P. W. (1982). Theory for the development ofneuron selectivity: orientation specificity and binocular interaction in visual cortex.J. Neurosci., Vol.2, pp .32-48.

Bliss, T. V. (1990). Long-term potentiation. Science, Vol.249, No.4972, pp. 973.Bliss, T. V. & Cooke, S. F. (2011). Long-term potentiation and long-term depression: a clinical

perspective. Clinics, Vol.66(S1), pp. 3-17.Bliss, T. V. & Collingridge, G. L. (1993). A synaptic model of memory: Long-term

potentiation in the hippocampus. Nature, Vol.361, No.6407, pp. 31-9.

www.intechopen.com


28/37


Bliss, T. V. & Lomo, T. (1973). Long-lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in thedentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path.J. Physiol., Vol.232, No.2, pp. 331-56.

Blundon, J. A. & Zakharenko, S. S. (2008). Dissecting the components of long-term

potentiation. Neuroscientist, Vol.14, No.6, pp. 598-608.Bolshakow, V. Y & Siegelbaum, S. A. (1994). Postsynaptic induction and presynaptic

expression of hippocampal long term depression. Science, Vol.264, pp. 1148-1152.Bramham, C. R., Alme, M. N., Bittins, M., Kuipers, S. D., Nair, R. R., Pai, B.,Panja, D.,

Schubert, M. & Soule, J. (2010). TheArc of synaptic memory. Exp. Brain Res, Vol.200,pp. 125-140.

Braunewell, K. H. & Manahan-Vaughan, D. (2001). Long-term depression: a cellular basisfor learning? Rev. Neurosci., Vol.12, pp. 121140.

Brigman, J. L., Wright, T., Talani, G., Mulcare, S. P., Jinde, S., Seabold, G. K., Mathu, P.,Davis, M. I., Bock, R., Gustin, R. M., Colbran, R. J., Alvarez, V. A., Nakazawa, K.,

Delpire, E., Lovinger, D. M. & Holmes,A. (2010). Loss of GluN2B-ContainingNMDA Receptors in CA1 Hippocampus and Cortex Impairs Long-TermDepression, Reduces Dendritic Spine Density, and Disrupts Learning. J. Neurosci.,Vol.30, No.13, pp. 45904600.

Bryne, J. H. & Roberts, J. L. (2009). From Molecules to Networks, An Introduction to Cellular andMolecular Neuroscience, (Ed.2). Elsevier, ISBN 978-0-12-374132-5, China.

Chapman, P. F., White, G. L., Jones, M. W., Cooper-Blacketer, D., Marshall, V. J., Irizarry,M., Younkin, L., Good, M. A., Bliss, T. V. P. & Hyman, B. T. (1999). Impairedsynaptic plasticity and learning in aged amyloid precursor protein transgenic mice.Nat. Neurosci., Vol.l2, pp. 271-276.

Chen, Q. S., Kagan, B. L., Hirakura, Y. & Xie, C. W. (2000). Impairment of hippocampal long-

term potentiation by Alzheimer amyloid beta-peptides. Journal of NeuroscienceResearch, Vol.60, pp. 6572.

Chen, Q. S., Wei, W. Z., Shimahara, T. & Xie, C. W. (2002). Alzheimer amyloid beta peptideinhibits the late phase of long-term potentiation through calcineurin-dependentmechanisms in the hippocampal dentate gyrus. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem., Vol.77, pp.354 371.

Cheriyan, J., Kumar, P., Mayadevi, M., Surolia, A. & Omkumar, R. V. (2011).Calcium/calmodulin dependent protein kinase II bound to NMDA receptor 2Bsubunit exhibits increased ATP affinity and attenuated dephosphorylation. PLoSOne, Vol.6, e16495.

Chung, H. J., Steinberg, J. P., Huganhir, R. L. & Linden, D. J. (2003). Requirement of AMPAreceptor GluR2 phosphorylation for cerebellar long term depression. Science,Vol.300, pp. 1751-1755.

Ciss, M., B., Halabisky, J., Harris, N., Devidze, D. B., Dubal, B., Sun, A., Orr, G., Lotz, D. H.,Kim & Hamto, P. (2011). Reversing EphB2 depletion rescues cognitive functions inAlzheimer model. Nature, Vol.469, pp. 47-52.

Collingridge, G. L., Peineau, S., Howland, J. G. & Wang, Y. T. (2010). Long-term depression

in the CNS, Nature Neurosci., Vol.11, pp. 459-473.Cooke, S. F. & Bliss, T. V. (2006). Plasticity in the human central nervous system. Brain,

Vol.129, No.Pt 7, pp. 1659-73.

www.intechopen.com


29/37


D'Amelio, M., Cavallucci, V., Middei, S., Marchetti, C., Pacioni ,S., Ferri ,A., Diamantini, A.,De Zio, D., Carrara, P., Battistini, L, Moreno, S., Bacci, A., Ammassari-Teule, M.,Marie, H. & Cecconi, F. (2011). Caspase-3 triggers early synaptic dysfunction in amouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Nature Neuroscience, Vol.14, pp. 69-76.

De Zeeuw, C. I., Hansel, C., Bian, F., Koekkoek, S. K. E., van Alphen, A. M, Linden D. J. &Oberdick, J. (1998). Expression of a Protein Kinase C Inhibitor in Purkinje CellsBlocks Cerebellar LTD and Adaptation of the vestibulo-Ocular Reflex. Neuron,Vol.20, pp. 495508.

Derkach, V., Barria, A. & Soderling, T. R. (1999). Ca2+/calmodulin-kinase II enhanceschannel conductance of alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionatetype glutamate receptors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A, Vol.96, No.6, pp. 3269-74.

Desai, N. S., Casimiro, T. M., Gruber, S. M. & Vanderklish, P. W. (2006). Early postnatalplasticity in neocortex of Fmr1 knockout mice. J. Neurophysiol., Vol.96, pp. 17341745.

Di Marzo, V., Melck, D., Bisogno, T. & De Petrocellis, L. (1998). Endocannabinoids:endogenous cannabinoid receptor ligands with neuromodulatory action. TrendsNeurosci., Vol.21, pp. 521528.

Diana, G., Domenici, M. R., Scotti de Carolis, A., Loizzo, A. & Sagratella, S. (1995). Reduced

hippocampal CA1 Ca(2+)-induced long-term potentiation is associated with age-dependent impairment of spatial learning. Brain Research, V

Documents

InTech-Molecular Mechanisms in Synaptic Plasticity